Journal of Consumer Behaviour, J. Consumer Behav.

13: 393–402 (2014)

Published online 7 July 2014 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/cb.1488

Identifying factors that promote consumer behaviours causing expired

domestic food waste
GEREMY FARR-WHARTON*, MARCUS FOTH and JAZ HEE-JEONG CHOI
Urban Informatics, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia

ABSTRACT

Many commentators argue that domestic food waste is strongly influenced by consumer behaviours. This article reports on a study using
mixed-methods to identify key factors responsible for promoting consumer behaviours that lead to domestic food waste through the lens
of the value–belief–norm theory. On the basis of the study’s findings, three factors are proposed that cause behaviours that lead to food
waste: supply knowledge – does a consumer know what food they have available; location knowledge – does a consumer know where
to locate food items; and food literacy – to what degree do past experience and acquired knowledge impact on a consumer’s food consump-
tion and wastage practices. We analyse the study’s findings in light of a review of literature about consumer food wastage behaviours and in
turn, present new insights into consumer behaviour, food waste and the use of technology to reduce food waste. Copyright © 2014 John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

INTRODUCTION There are a number of theories to explain behaviour

Food waste presents a threat to the environment because of
greenhouse gas contributions and the wasted resources used
to produce, process, market, transport and refrigerate food
(Rosenzweig and Parry, 1994; Fischer et al., 1995; Parry
et al., 2004; Godfray et al., 2010; Parfitt et al., 2010). These
implications represent wastes along the entire food supply
chain, having adverse effects on agriculture, the economy,
land availability, the environment, and food sustainability
and security (Kaiser, 2011).
Numerous researches have provided insights suggesting
opportunities to reduce food waste at critical stages of the
supply chain. These include food management alterations
by the agricultural industry, food grocers and processing in-
dustries, as well as food marketing commerce and hospitality
and retail industries (Kantor et al., 1997; Tsiros and Heilman,
2005; Cox et al., 2010; Godfray et al., 2010; Parfitt et al.,
2010). Industry has targeted food spoilage reduction by
examining consumer behaviour to inform food policies and
industry standards (Tsiros and Heilman, 2005). Interventions
assisting consumers have included mitigation strategies to re-
duce domestic food waste (e.g. Ene, 2008; Schneider, 2008).
Technology that targets behaviour is one such way to assist
in reducing domestic food waste. However, despite efforts,
the average consumers’ annual household garbage comprises
40–60 per cent food waste (Caswell, 2008), contributing ap-
proximately 20 per cent to landfills (Wade, 2011, p. 48).
Stern (2000) argues that behaviours impacting the environ-
ment are environmentally significant behaviours. We argue
that behaviours causing domestic food waste are environmen-
tally significant behaviours. These behaviours are complex,
and Stern (2000) suggests that many behaviour change theo-
ries are insufficient in determining environmentally signifi-
cant behavioural indicators (Stern, 2000).
*Correspondence to: Geremy Farr-Wharton, Urban Informatics, Queensland
University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
E-mail: g.farrwharton@qut.edu.au
change. The theory of planned behaviour (TPB) is widely
used to explain behaviour change by providing possible
causes of behaviour through examining consumers’ beliefs,
attitudes and intentions (Ajzen, 2011). TPB does not accom-
modate a consumer’s knowledge and skill for particular
actions and is therefore, inadequate in determining the im-
pact of such indicators. Also, a number of external influences
are not included in the TPB formula, such as community ex-
pectations, advertisement and marketing and public policies
in place that support behaviour.For this paper, the value–
belief–norm (VBN) theory has proven useful for examining
the impact of consumer decision-making behaviour regarding
food and wastage. VBN theory provides a framework to
examine causes of behaviours that are associated with
nonactivist environmentalism, which refers to consumers
whose behaviours impact the environment, regardless of in-
tent (Stern, 2000). Understanding the circumstances in which
these behaviours occur helps to identify the original causes.
These causes can then be addressed to encourage a change
in behaviour (Stern, 2000) in terms of the following:
(i) attitudinal factors regarding an individual’s norms,
values and beliefs;
(ii) external or contextual forces, which refer to the level of
impact that community, institutional, social and legal
expectations have on an individual;
(iii) personal capabilities concerning the knowledge and
skills required for an individual to perform an action;
(iv) habit or routine regarding an individual’s established
habitual behaviour and everyday practice.
Different combinations of these conditions can influence con-
sumer behaviour. Our study seeks to identify the factors promoting
consumer behaviours resulting in domestic food waste.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Schneider (2008) argues that on average, around 25 per cent
of the available food supply is wasted globally. Wastages

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

394 G. Farr-Wharton et al.
happen along the food supply chain with significant portions
of losses occurring in domestic settings (Ambler-Edwards
et al., 2009) and to a lesser extent at food retail outlets (Kantor
et al., 1997; Schneider, 2008). Industry implements a variety
of policies and initiatives to reduce and manage food wast-
ages (e.g. using waste as animal feed) (Tsiros and Heilman,
2005; Darlington et al., 2009). Domestic food waste is largely
uncontrolled despite numerous attempts to reduce it by means
of behaviour modification, raising food waste awareness
and persuasion using intrinsic and incentive motivation
(e.g. Bucci et al., 2010; Thieme et al., 2012). Bucci et al.
(2010) examined a fridge that alerts users about product expi-
ration dates, suggests recipes, sends shopping lists via SMS
or email and posts messages to household members. Thieme
et al. (2012) examined the effectiveness of BinCam; a camera
placed in a bin alerting consumers of their waste practices.
There is a range of explanations as to why these initiatives
failed to result in sustained behaviour change, including per-
ceived usefulness, perceived ease of use (Davis, 1986), and
challenges regarding consumers acceptance to use technology
aimed at supporting everyday activities and practices. Within
the household, Kantor et al. (1997) found that the majority of
waste comprised expired foods, forgotten in storage. Quanti-
ties of domestic food wastes are attributable to consumer be-
haviours, promoted by many influences occurring during
food purchasing, cooking, consumption and disposal.
Baumeister (2002) and Ene (2008) argue that consumers are
encouraged to purchase food excessively, because of exposure
to marketing ploys influencing their decisions to buy products
impulsively, irrespective of the value to consumers. Further,
commercially processed food is a relatively cheap commodity,
encouraging consumers to stockpile food or buy in bulk. Those
consumers that have not experienced scarcity are often not
overly concerned about ensuring the consumption of all the
food they purchased before it expires. Therefore, they are more
likely to throw out expired unconsumed goods (Godfray et al.,
2010). In their review, Tsiros and Heilman (2005) explored
how methods for industry could assist reduced food spoilage
by examining consumer behaviours regarding the effect that
expiration dates have on purchasing decisions. Their insights
show many consumers require a greater awareness of food
expiry labelling and the literacy to adequately interpret such la-
bels. This would enable consumers to become better informed
of accidental product purchasing close to expiration. Tsiros
and Heilman (2005) also argue that there is a greater need for
industry to provide uniform classification methods to date the
expiry of food. This action would serve to further reduce con-
sumer confusion regarding food expiration, not only during
food purchasing but in domestic settings as well. These exter-
nal influences point to underlying promoters of particular food
purchasing behaviours that contribute to domestic food waste,
such as the stockpiling of food. To help overcome these influ-
ences, our study investigates the factors directly influencing
those behaviours that result in domestic food waste.
Influencing consumer behaviours is no easy task and has
been met with varying successes in the past. Vermeir and
Verbeke (2006) argue that increases in consumer interest
and attitudes towards sustainable food practices do not nec-
essarily trigger a change in consumer behaviour. Although
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
consumers may have an interest towards sustainable food
practices, external factors may prevent them from performing
and sustaining such practices. Stern (2000) claims that the
most effective approach to encourage a change in environmen-
tally significant behaviour requires a combination of interven-
tions, including (i) using religious and moral approaches that
appeal to the values of individuals and influence their world-
views; (ii) providing information and education to shift an in-
dividual’s attitude; (iii) rewarding desired behaviours through
material or monetary incentives and penalising individuals
for undesired behaviours; and (iv) providing a shared under-
standing of rules and expectations through community man-
agement. However, Stern (2000) also argues regardless of the
combination of interventions used, at least one intervention
must remove key barriers preventing change and should be tai-
lored to an individual’s situation. Van et al., (2003) suggests
sustainable food practices are based on a decision-making
process that engages a consumer, not only in their individual
desires and needs but also their perceived social responsibility.
Vermeir and Verbeke (2006) found that everyday purchasing
and consumption practices are heavily motivated by a variety
of influences such as convenience, habitual behaviour, diet
and health concerns, perceived value for money, hedonism/
lifestyle and social responsibility perceived through social
norms. However, some consumers may still be resistant to
change (Dawson, 2000; Tucker and Douglas, 2007). This
reinforces the need to consider opportunities to influence
external factors to help people adopt and sustain behaviours
to reduce food wastage.
Factors that influence food behaviours include social norms,
attitudes, cultural upbringing, experience, knowledge and un-
derstanding of food (Brunner et al., 2007 cited in (Ganglbauer,
Fitzpatrick, & Comber, 2013)). Knowledge and understanding
of food refer to an individual’s food literacy (Vidgen and
Gallegos, 2010). Vidgen and Gallegos (2010) describe food lit-
eracy as the knowledge and understanding that individuals and
communities have of food, and how it can be used to meet their
needs. Schneider and Obersteiner (2007) provide key drivers
that shape behaviours, resulting in food wastage. They suggest
that age, income and time spent at home are factors to consider
when examining behaviours. Situational conditions, such as
smell, appetite and desire for food have implications for food
wastage (Schneider, 2008). Schneider (2008) proposes several
methods of waste prevention for use in households: a shopping
list, using highlighted tabulated measurements for rational food
portion sizes, education in creative uses of food leftovers,
education about the equivalent monetary value of wasted
food items for a given consumer and general food waste
awareness training.
Therefore, our study is guided by the research question:
Why do consumers waste domestic food?
METHODOLOGY
Two sequential methods of data collection (DC) over a 3-month
period were employed to address the research questions: DC1 –
a convergent interviewing process (Dick, 1990, 2000) – and
DC2 – ethnographically inspired participant observations.
J. Consumer Behav. 13: 393–402 (2014)
DOI: 10.1002/cb
 Factors promoting behaviours causing food waste 395

One or two vegetables a month

One or two vegetables a month
One or two vegetables a month
One or two vegetables a week
Convergent interviews (DC1) involved 12 participants

Food waste production

(Table 1). Participant observations (DC2) involved six house-

Several vegetables a week

A 5L bin’s worth a week
A 5L bin’s worth a week

A 5L bin’s worth a week

A 5L bin’s worth a week

A 5L bin’s worth a week

One or two items a week
holds comprising 17 individuals (Table 2).
Participants were recruited from a survey disseminated to
the general public before the undertaking of DC1 and DC2.
DC1 and DC2 participants underwent a screening process
before they were recruited. In the case of DC1, participants

No items
were recruited on the basis of a dissimilar combination of
their age, sex, living arrangements, working arrangements
and household type, as required in a convergent interview
protocol (Dick, 1990, 2000). DC2 initially employed similar

Family household (including a partner and child)

Family household (including a partner and child)

restrictions for recruitment. However, the households ini-
tially approached expressed reluctance to become involved
in the study because of the intensive and personal nature of

Family household – lives with parents

the observations, which made us reduce the original restric-

Three-bedroom house – lives alone

Living arrangements
tions to only require more than one occupant per household
in DC2. This enabled us to examine external and contextual
forces that may surface and might be significant in influencing
household behaviours regarding food with respect to the

Unit – lives with sister

four considerations of the VBN theory: (i) attitudinal factors;

Couple household
Couple household
Couple household

Couple household

Family household
(ii) external and contextual forces; (iii) personal capabilities;

Shared household

Shared household
and (iv) routine or habit.
The procedure in DC1 consisted of open-ended questions
concerning five main areas: grocery shopping practices and
experiences, food storage practices, household cooking habits,
food waste management practices and food waste prevalence.
Interviews took 45 min on average, and participants were

Per meal shopping (several small top-up shops a week)

Per meal shopping (several small top-up shops a week)
Per meal shopping (several small top-up shops a week)
encouraged to add further details they thought relevant. These

One large shop a week, two small shops a fortnight

details were then converted into questions and integrated into

Once a week large shop with several small shops

Once a week large shop with several small shops

future interviews. DC1 took place over a 4-week period.
Table 1. A description of the similarities and differences between data collection 1 participants

Participants were continually recruited until theme saturation

occurred and no new themes surfaced. Thematical analysis

Several small shops throughout the week

was applied to the interviews to derive emergent themes.
Several small shops through the week

DC2 followed the progression of food during the con-

sumer phase of the food lifecycle over a 4-week period. This
Makes regular shops per week

entailed observing household practices during post-purchasing

(receipt), storage and consumption of food. It also required ob-
One small shop a week
One large shop a week

serving waste management practices. Five questions guided

throughout the week

throughout the week

As-needed shopping

observations: (i) What shopping practices do households em-

Shopping habits

ploy? (ii) What do consumers characterise as expired food?

(iii) How do consumers handle expired waste? (iv) What quan-
tity of expired waste do households produce? and (v) Is a sys-
tem of food organisation practiced when households store
food?
Addressing these questions involved the research team
completing a five-stage process: (i) the collection of shop-
old male university student
old female student nurse

ping dockets; (ii) taking photos of the inside of the fridges;

31-year old female PhD student

41-year old female PhD student

old professional female

37-year old female professional

28-year old male PhD student,
old professional male

old professional male

28-year old male professional

(iii) examining the contents of a bin (provided to house-

old female pensioner
Participant description
old female actress

holds), which contained the expired food waste accumulated

over 1 week; (iv) weekly informal interviews; and (v) a final
debrief interview, which was carried out once at the conclu-
sessional academic

sion of the study. With the exception of the final interview,

each component was actioned once a week in the partici-
pant’s home with questions directed at a single household
22-year
40-year
30-year
77-year
26-year
19-year
29-year

representative who had been chosen by all household resi-

dents. The interview questions addressed the participants’
food purchasing, cooking, consumption and waste manage-
ment practices. Fridge photos applied visual ethnographic
C10
C11
C12
No.
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7

C8

C9

techniques (Schwartz, 1989; Pink, 2007; Choi, 2010) to

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Consumer Behav. 13: 393–402 (2014)
DOI: 10.1002/cb
396 G. Farr-Wharton et al.
Table 2. A description of defining characteristics of each data collection 2 household
Household Number of occupants
No. type Living arrangements in household
H1 House Family household Three (including a child)
H2 House Family household Three (including a dependent adult)
H3 Apartment Couple household Two
H4 Unit Shared household Three (a couple and a housemate)
H5 Apartment Couple household Two
H6 House Shared household Four
examine the subtle differences in storage patterns between
households. Fridge photos additionally illustrated the movement
of food and provided contextual insights about interactions
consumers had with their food. The collection of shopping item
lists and shopping receipts depicted an approximate inventory of
food for households. This, in conjunction with interview re-
sponses, helped us in identifying household shopping practices.
Final interviews in DC2 explored the experiences of
household residents and comprised open-ended questions,
concerning three areas: (i) the experiences of consumers during
the study; (ii) the impression of consumers whether they felt
the study had an impact on their awareness of their food
shopping, storing, consumption and waste management
practices; and (iii) suggestions for future technologies that
may encourage reduced expired domestic wastage.
FINDINGS
Four underlying themes emerged from the results and are
discussed in order of prevalence and importance. Themes re-
late to our study participants’ common practices regarding
their food purchasing, storage and consumption or wastage.
Domestic food storage practices
Storage practices emerged as the most significant theme
influencing the link between behaviour and food waste prev-
alence. On investigating consumer storage practices, our
findings showed that a range of factors promote different be-
haviours causing expired food waste. There is an underlying
need to assist consumers with food storage and support a sys-
tem of organisation to help consumers easily locate items.
DC1 participants provided details of how they store food in
their household. Their responses characterised three food
storage practices: a systematic and categorisation approach,
an approach where items are placed in available locations
and an approach based on random and nonsystematic place-
ment of food items. DC1 responses showed most consumers
have some knowledge of their current household food
supply. DC2 observations indicated that implementing a sys-
tematic and categorisation approach is likely to reduce the
amount of food waste. However, a number of DC2 house-
holds stated locating free space to place food led to
disorganisation, resulting in food becoming easily lost and
often expiring before being relocated. DC2 observations of-
ten associated this occurrence with refrigerators that reached
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Household
Shopping habits income
One big shop a week, with one or >$200 000 pa
two small top-up shops
One big shop a week >$200 000 pa
One big shop at the markets a $80 000 pa
week, with several small top ups
Several small shops a week >$150 000 pa
One moderate shop a week, with $80 000 pa
several small top ups
Two small shops a week >$100 000 pa
storage capacity when yet more items had to be added. Com-
ments regarding the low visibility of food items within the re-
frigerator, particularly of items that were not located towards
the front of shelves, also surfaced in both DC1 and DC2.
Household H2 in DC2 provided a key example of a
household that implemented an organised food storage sys-
tem (Figure 1). H2 discarded expired food only once during
the study (a single product of mayonnaise), whereas all other
DC2 households discarded expired food each week of the
study (note that H2 joined the study in the second week of
the experiment; hence, there are no photos from the first
week). H2 indicated that food expiring was not common in
their household, because their storage system was structured
and orderly and all household members proactively took part
in making themselves aware of the available food and its
location. H2 also noted their initiative in learning how to
increase food longevity by identifying ways to better store
and preserve food. Figure 1 illustrates the different assortment
of containers used by H2 to store food in their fridge. Similar
storage patterns are implemented in all food storage locations.
In addition, responses from all household members in H2
indicated that they were reluctant to throw away expired food
if it had only recently passed its expiry date. H2 would com-
monly eat produce that appeared bruised or had abrasions.
However, four DC1 participants’ responses showed that
because of a number of negative experiences with food in
the past, some individuals pay close attention to matters
concerning food. Participants’ responses suggested that for
some individuals, food that has remained in storage for more
than a few days is disposed of. Childhood experiences of
food – particularly dairy expiring before its actual expiry date –
contributed to this behaviour.
Firstly, these findings suggest consumers could benefit
from a better understanding of food edibility, including when
food can still be consumed safely. Secondly, these findings
point to a need of informing and persuading consumers to
adopt methods to not only better store and preserve food
but also to use food creatively and in more diverse ways
before it expires. The findings also highlight the benefits of
devising a tailored way to establish an organised system of
food storage and the strong association with lower waste
production in households with such systems.
Food shopping and purchasing practices
On investigating consumer purchasing behaviours, our findings
showed consumers are often unaware of their food stock, and
J. Consumer Behav. 13: 393–402 (2014)
DOI: 10.1002/cb

Figure 1. The 3-week progression of food placed in and removed from H2’s refrigerator. This figure is available in color online at
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/cb
this lack of information promotes the purchasing of items
they already own. DC1 revealed participants’ shopping prac-
tices could be characterised as ‘under-prepared’ or ‘prepared’.
• Under-prepared: Those who did little to prepare prior to
food shopping and would commonly purchase similar food
items during each shopping experience. Participants would
seldom review their current food stock before going to
shop for more food and thus risk stockpiling items that
were already in the fridge or pantry.
• Prepared: Those who planned and structured their shop-
ping experiences on the basis of a shopping list, where
food was purchased according to planned meals. Often,
the participant would examine the fridge or pantry before
creating the list.
Six DC1 participants and three DC2 participants used
shopping lists. The shopping frequency across both charac-
teristics generally matched a large shop once a week, with
several smaller ‘top-up’ shops to purchase high turnover
foods, such as milk and bread. DC1 and DC2 responses
showed that the majority of food they purchased was from
major supermarket chains, with some stating they also pur-
chased fresh produced from delis and farmers markets. Those
who commented on farmers markets noted the shorter shelf
life of items purchased at farmers markets and stated fre-
quently being frustrated with items expiring before they were
able to consume them. C2, C7, C8 and C9 in DC1 stated
food variety and freshness were the main considerations
influencing the choice to shop at a particular supermarket
chain over another. Bulk purchasing attitudes were prevalent
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Factors promoting behaviours causing food waste 397
in both DC1 and DC2 motivated by its perceived monetary
benefit. This was noted with frequent comments regarding
‘buy bulk and save’. Bulk purchases were also reported to
be one of the prime contributors to expired food waste.
DC1 respondents provided examples such as buying spring
onions in bulk (spring onions are often purchased in bun-
dles), but not using all spring onions available when cooking,
‘because there was [sic] too many to use’ [C2]. This was
the case with a variety of produce items often sold in bulk
(e.g. tomatoes, spinach and celery). Further, DC2 observations
showed that households with more than one person purchasing
food are subject to miscommunication between household
members, which led to multiple same-day purchases of a
product. This occurrence was not prevalent across the study
households. However, H1 and H4 mentioned this occurrence
happening more than once during the study. DC1 inter-
viewees also stated that on occasion, they would shop for
specific planned meals. However, unforseen events would
prevent them from being able to consume the food for the
planned meal. For example, C9 stated, ‘I had planned to eat
the salad I bought for lunch, but my sister-in-law came over
for lunch and we decided to go out. I never got the chance
to eat it after that.’
DC2 observations showed that some fresh produce were
not always refrigerated and often expired within 2 days of
purchase. On raising this practice with households, responses
showed that the participants did not know appropriate preser-
vation methods to prolong food shelf life or had limited
refrigeration space. H3 provides an example of limited refrig-
eration space (Figure 1). H3 stated their fridge was small, and
J. Consumer Behav. 13: 393–402 (2014)
DOI: 10.1002/cb
398 G. Farr-Wharton et al.
space was a continuous problem; therefore, they indicated
they did not practice systematic storage. However, condi-
ments and dairy products are generally kept in specific parts
of the fridge such as the shelves on the door (Figure 2). Re-
sponses from DC1 and DC2 showed that consumers regu-
larly cook large meals to last for several days. The cooked
meal or leftovers were wrapped or repackaged and placed
into the refrigerator, often ‘wherever there was room to do
so’ [H3]. DC2 households that undertook this practice also
stated that items and item locations would easily be forgotten,
particularly if placed or pushed behind other items. In many
instances, participants’ responses implied those orphaned
products expired more frequently than others, because they
‘wouldn’t [sic] be found until the regular clean out of the
fridge’ [H1]. Respondents also indicated that given the oppor-
tunity to reflect on common household practices, which is what
DC2 facilitated, household members reduced the quantity of
food purchased. This was because the members took more no-
tice of food spoilage occurring as a result of stockpiling, forget-
ting the locations of placed items and increasing their food
knowledge and literacy. This highlights the need to find better
ways to make consumers more aware of their current food sup-
ply in storage, thereby minimising food stockpiling and make
better, more informed choices during food purchasing. It also
stresses a need to inform consumers of methods to increase
food longevity tailored to their households.
Food cooking and consumption practices
When examining food purchasing and consumption behav-
iours, the findings suggested a majority of our participants
might not know how to judge whether food is edible or
spoiled, particularly with regard to leftover ingredients or
meals placed in storage. DC1 responses showed that partici-
pants would occasionally cook large meals with the intention
to consume them over several sittings. However, some DC1
Figure 2. The 4-week progression of food placed in and removed from H3’s refrigerator. This figure is available in color online at
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/cb
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
participants stated on occasion inadvertently cooked meals
larger than they could consume in a single sitting. In both
situations, the participants would store the leftovers in the
fridge. DC2 observations showed that leftover meals were
often consumed over consecutive days and would rarely
expire. However, the household bin photos (for expired wast-
age) illustrated that on occasion, leftovers became no longer
edible before they could be consumed. On raising this occur-
rence with household members, a common theme surfaced
regarding their lost desire to consume leftovers. DC2 obser-
vations also revealed that the majority of households
regularly produced leftover ingredients. The participants’
responses about this practice suggested that the leftover
ingredients were often forgotten about when placed back in
storage, because they were small and often placed behind
other items. Responses further showed that other household
members did not always know if leftover ingredients were
available, because the leftovers were placed in storage by
another household member and was not communicated to
others. This points to a need for consumers to become
informed of the locations of leftover meal and ingredients.
DC2 observations also illustrated that two households had
misinformed knowledge of when leftover ingredients expire
and would often discard the ingredient for fear it would taint
a meal. H1 in DC2 stated they did not know how to trust their
senses to judge food’s edibility and would therefore dispose
of any foods they were unsure of (Figure 3). This highlights a
need to inform consumers about the durability and shelf life
of foods in food storage.
DISCUSSION
The findings from DC1 and DC2 were used to identify under-
lying factors promoting those consumer behaviours resulting
J. Consumer Behav. 13: 393–402 (2014)
DOI: 10.1002/cb

Figure 3. H1’s expired food wastages over the 4-week study. Note that the majority of items consisted predominately of fruit, vegetables and
bread, with the occasional dairy product. This figure is available in color online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/cb
in expired domestic food waste. The strongest theme emerging
from our analysis is that the majority of expired wastage
in domestic environments occurs because of behaviours
enacted during food purchasing, storage and consumption.
The identified factors for such behaviours all pivot around
food storage. If key information about food items stored
within the household is provided during food purchasing,
consumers are less likely to purchase items they already
own. This practice would reduce food stockpiling and conse-
quently reduce expired wastages associated with such behav-
iours. In addition, if consumers employ a system of food
storage, particularly with high turnover foods, a reduction in
expired waste caused from forgotten foods is likely to be ex-
perienced. Therefore, a systematic approach to food storage
could assist consumers in increasing the likelihood that food
is consumed before it expires. The findings do not necessarily
shed light on how a system of storage may work effectively in
a household. However, on the basis of our findings, we have
trialled the use of a colour code scheme within a household’s
fridge. The colour code scheme is similar to that often used
with kitchen cutting boards depicting which cutting board
to use for specific food groups (examples include using the
colour green for produce and the colour red for meat)
(Farr-Wharton et al., 2012).
More generally, our findings also showed that working on
improving the ad hoc communication between household
members involved in food purchasing may further alleviate
food wastage because of the doubling up of products. Fur-
ther, our findings indicate the root cause of communication
challenges again stem from a lack of systematic food storage
within households. This reinforces our observations that a
system of food storage would assist consumers to easily
identify the location of their available foods. However, a lack
of real-time information about a consumer’s current food
supply may also contribute to the cause of these incidents
occurring. Our findings also indicate that mechanisms for
domestic waste reduction such as shopping lists and planning
meals (Schneider, 2008) may also reduce the occurrence of
these incidents and help to encourage a shift in shopping
routine. Therefore, opportunities to present consumers with
mechanisms for systematic food storage and providing real-
time information about current food stock when purchasing
food may offer fruitful avenues for future research.
We also found our study participants to be prone to mar-
keting ploys during food shopping that promoted savings
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Factors promoting behaviours causing food waste 399
through bulk purchases, confirming arguments raised by
Baumeister (2002) and Ene (2008). Further, when we exam-
ine consumer behaviour through VBN theory, it shows how
external and contextual forces can drive behaviour that result
in food wastage. Stern (2000) argues advertising and monetary
incentives are external forces that can influence consumers’
decision-making. In this case, our study participants were sus-
ceptible to the advertising and known monetary benefits that
accompany bulk purchases. If consumers are provided with
key information about their current food supply, in conjunction
with being reminded of the impact of previous purchase deci-
sions (e.g. a whole bunch of spring onions being wasted, as
the recipe only calls for one), it may better inform their pur-
chasing choices, encouraging a shift in consumer purchasing
behaviours, and in turn, consumer demand. However, foods
such as spring onions are often only sold in bulk. In these
cases, there is a need to provide greater awareness and support
the knowledge and skills to better utilise food creatively in
order to ensure its consumption before expiration. Facilitating
social engagement between consumers may present one such
opportunity to increase the personal capabilities (Stern, 2000)
of consumers. For example, sharing of recipes and cooking
experiences between consumers could help individuals learn
new ways to better utilise the food they purchase.
We observed our study participants to experience difficul-
ties in judging food’s edibility. The findings showed con-
sumers, particularly those who had negative experiences
with food in the past, were prone to dispose of food prema-
turely. In addition, consumers often did not know whether
foods such as leftover meals and ingredients were still suit-
able for consumption. VBN theory regards the personal capa-
bilities of individuals, including their knowledge and skills to
perform a task, as a cause of behaviours that may contribute
to undesirable behaviours. A consumer’s food literacy based
on their acquired knowledge and past experiences with food
has a significant impact on their behavioural intention.
Schneider (2008) and Brunner et al. (2007) stated that con-
sumer knowledge, experience and understanding of food
are key influences on consumer behaviour. These influences
also indicate a consumer’s personal capabilities regarding
food. According to VBN theory, a consumer’s habit and
routine greatly influences their behaviours and changing
behaviour requires old habits to be broken (Stern, 2000).
Our findings show that consumers could benefit from mech-
anisms that support consumer learning with regard to food
J. Consumer Behav. 13: 393–402 (2014)
DOI: 10.1002/cb
400 G. Farr-Wharton et al.
literacy. Therefore, this presents opportunities for future re-
search to explore how consumers can be provided with a
greater knowledge of food and its edibility to reduce the pre-
mature disposal of food.
In addition, some study participants would cook large meals
with the intention of consuming them over several consecutive
days in an effort to save time and money. However, occasion-
ally, consumers would lose the desire to consume the same
food after one or two sittings, confirming factors previously
identified by Schneider (2008). These situations are noted as
a minor factor for two reasons: (i) This factor is less likely to
contribute to behavioural intent, and our findings depicted little
waste caused by these situations; and (ii) these situations might
be prevented if the major factors are addressed.
Therefore, our findings suggest three major and two minor
causal factors promote behaviours resulting in domestic food
wastage. The distinction between ‘major’ and ‘minor’ is as
follows: ‘Major’ refers to a significant contribution to behav-
ioural intent, and a larger quantity of expired food waste is
likely to be generated as a result. ‘Minor’ refers to less signif-
icant contributions to behavioural intent, often outside a con-
sumer’s control, and a smaller quantity of expired waste is
likely to be produced. The following characterises each of
the factors identified by our study:
• Current household food supply knowledge – Does the con-
sumer know what food items are currently available for
consumption in their household? This factor becomes in-
creasingly important with longer shelf life food items.
• Current household food item location knowledge – Does
the consumer know where to locate a desired food item
within their household?
• Food literacy – referring to the acquired knowledge and
past experiences of consumers
- Has the consumer had negative experiences with partic-
ular foods previously, which has thereby led to repeated
practices where food is disposed of prematurely?
- Does the consumer know how to creatively use food
when cooking meals in order to ensure its consumption
before expiration?
Figure 4. A visual representation of the causal factors identified to promote those consumer behaviors that result in expired domestic food
waste. This figure is available in color online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/cb
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Our study identified two minor factors:
• Unplanned events – Has the consumer experienced ad hoc,
‘spur-of-the-moment’ situations that led to a cancellation
of a previously planned consumption of food, purchased
specifically for that planned meal?
• No desire to consume leftover food – Has the consumer
cooked a large meal with the intention for it to span several
consecutive meal times but lost desire to consume the
leftovers before they expire?
Understanding these factors promoting behavioural intent
is crucial for mitigating their impact. We analyse these fac-
tors using VBN theory as a lens. From this, we are able to
segment each factor into a combination of the four consider-
ations, which Stern (2000) argues are key causes of behav-
iours associated with nonactivist environmentalism. First, a
consumer’s knowledge of their current household food sup-
ply underpins several influences that result in wastage. These
included (i) the tendency for our participants to stockpile
food, which was influenced by external forces during pur-
chasing, such as advertising and marketing ploys and (ii)
the shopping routine of some of our participants who would
commonly do little to prepare before shopping, such as using
shopping lists and preplanning meals.
Second, we argue the ability of consumers to locate de-
sired foods can be evaluated by examining household rou-
tine. This consideration refers to the need for a household
to develop a preplanned systematic food storage routine,
which household members practice continuously.
Third, we argue a consumer’s food literacy can be
examined with respect to their personal capabilities to judge
a food edibility using their knowledge, skills and past
experiences. However, we suggest that attitudinal factors,
such as consumer’s beliefs and values, placed on food and
its edibility influences their behaviours, possibly resulting
in wastage. For example, consumer’s negative experiences
with food previously can instil the belief not to trust the
edibility of those particular foods in the future. This may
encourage the habit of an individual to prematurely dispose
of food.
Fourth, attitudinal factors and external forces can also im-
pede consumers using preplanned meals. Our participants
J. Consumer Behav. 13: 393–402 (2014)
DOI: 10.1002/cb

noted having purchased food for a planned mealtime. How-
ever, spur-of-the-moment situations led to the cancellation
of consuming that food, which resulted in wastage. Evaluating
this practice with respect to VBN theory, we argue that
norms and social expectations, such as the need to entertain
visitors instead of consuming food purchased for a
preplanned mealtime, can cause behaviours that result in
food wastage. We further argue a consumer’s willingness
to consume leftover food after they have lost the desire to
do so can be explained through attitudinal factors, specifi-
cally the value placed on the leftover food the individual is
consuming.
Employing VBN theory allowed us to better understand
why consumers are impacted by attitudinal factors, external
and contextual forces, personal capabilities and habit or
routine. This allowed us to understand how these factors
promote behaviours leading to food wastage. Although
consumers might have an interest in reducing domestic
waste, external or contextual factors can prevent them from
pursuing that initiative and therefore, confirms the findings
of Vermeir and Verbeke (2006) suggesting attitudes and
interest do not denote behaviour. Figure 4 shows a visual
representation of the identified causal factors promoting
those behaviours resulting in expired domestic food waste
and a synopsis of our discussion. The figure depicts a four-
stage process that food follows post-purchase and shows
where the factors are likely to promote behaviours.
CONCLUSION
Our study investigated and sought to better understand the
causes of consumer behaviours that result in expired domes-
tic food wastage through the lens of the VBN theory. We
identified three core causal factors: (i) food supply knowl-
edge; (ii) food location knowledge; and (iii) food literacy.
The analysis of our data assisted us in proposing opportuni-
ties to influence consumer behaviours and avenues for future
research. This included examples such as the following:
(i) mechanisms to support consumer learning regarding
food literacy and personal capabilities through sharing of
recipes and cooking experiences; (ii) interventions assisting
systematic storage practices in household fridges to help
consumers identify the location of food; and (iii) providing
real-time information of current food stocks during food
purchasing to reduce food stockpiling. We argued VBN
theory was useful for our study to help us determine and
explain the impact of consumer behaviour regarding food
and wastage. Through the analysis of our findings, we were
able to segment the factors we identified into the four consid-
erations noted by the VBN theory: (i) attitudinal factors; (ii)
external and contextual forces; (iii) personal capabilities; and
(iv) routine or habit. Understanding these factors paves the
way for future research targeting their mitigation or reducing
their influence on behaviours. The experimental research
design we used for our study can be applied to future inter-
ventions targeting behaviour change to reduce domestic
food wastage.
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Factors promoting behaviours causing food waste 401
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank our study participants for their time and contribu-
tion. This research is supported under the Australian Research
Council Linkage scheme (LP100100232). We thank our part-
ners for their support: www.urbaninformatics.net/partners.
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES
Mr. Geremy Farr-Wharton is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Urban Informat-
ics Research Lab, Queensland University of Technology (Australia).
His areas of research interests are in environmental sustainability, food
waste, human-computer interaction, and consumer behavior.
Professor Marcus Foth is founder and director of the Urban Infor-
matics Research Lab, and Professor in Interactive and Visual Design
in the School of Design, Creative Industries Faculty at Queensland
University of Technology (Australia). His areas of research interests
are in urban planning, environmental sustainability, food futures,
and collaboration and co-working spaces.
Dr. Jaz Hee-Jeong Choi is the Deputy Director of the Urban Infor-
matics Research Lab and a Senior Lecturer in the School of Design,
Creative Industries Faculty at Queensland University of Technology
(Australia). Her research interests are in playful technology, partic-
ularly the ways in which various forms of playful interaction are
designed, developed, and integrated in different cultural contexts.
REFERENCES
Ajzen I. 2011. Theory of planned behavior. Handbook of Theories
of Social Psychology 1: 438.
Ambler-Edwards S, Bailey K, Kiff A, Lang T, Lee R, Marsden T,
Simons D, Tibbs H. 2009. Food Futures: Rethinking UK Strategy:
Chatham House.
Baumeister RF. 2002. Yielding to temptation: self-control failure,
impulsive purchasing, and consumer behavior. Journal of con-
sumer research 28(4): 670–676.
Brunner KM, Geyer S, Jelenko M, Weiss W, Astleithner F. 2007.
Ernährungsalltag im Wandel: Chancen für Nachhaltigkeit.
Springer: Wien.
Bucci M, Calefato C, Colombetti S, Milani M, Montanari R. 2010.
Fridge fridge on the wall: what can I cook for us all?: an HMI
study for an intelligent fridge.
Caswell H. 2008. Britain’s battle against food waste. Nutrition Bul-
letin 33(4): 331–335.
Choi JH. 2010. The city, self, and connections: transyouth and ur-
ban social networking in Seoul. London, New York: Routledge.
Cox J, Giorgi S, Sharp V, Strange K, Wilson DC, Blakey N. 2010.
Household waste prevention – a review of evidence. Waste Man-
agement & Research 28(3): 193.
Darlington R, Staikos T, Rahimifard S. 2009. Analytical methods
for waste minimisation in the convenience food industry. Waste
Management 29(4): 1274–1281.
Davis F. 1986. A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically
Testing New End-User Information Systems. Massachusetts
Institute of Technology: Massachusetts.
Dawson CR. 2000. Qualitative Research to Explore Public Attitudes
to Food Safety. Report for the Food Standards Agency.
Dick R. 1990. Convergent Interviewing. Chapel Hill, Qld: Interchange.
Dick R. 2000. Convergent interviewing: a technique for qualitative
data collection. Available at http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/
gcm/ar/arp/iview.html [Accessed on 24 September 2011].
Ene C. 2008. Consumer behaviour concerning post-consumer
waste: Petroleum-Gas University of Ploiesti.
Farr-Wharton G, Foth M, Choi JH. 2012. Colour Coding the Fridge
to Reduce Food Waste. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the
24th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference.
J. Consumer Behav. 13: 393–402 (2014)
DOI: 10.1002/cb
402 G. Farr-Wharton et al.
Fischer G, Frohberg K, Parry ML, Rosenzweig C, Downing T.
1995. Impact of potential climate change on global and regional
food production and vulnerability.
Ganglbauer E, Fitzpatrick G, Comber R. 2013. Negotiating Food
Waste: Using a Practice Lens to Inform Design. ACM Transac-
tions on Computer-Human Interaction (ToCHI) 20(2).
Godfray HCJ, Beddington JR, Crute IR, Haddad L, Lawrence D, Muir JF,
Pretty J, Robinson S, Thomas SM, Toulmin C. 2010. Food security:
the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 327(5967): 812.
Kaiser ML. 2011. Food security: an ecological–social analysis to promote
social development. Journal of Community Practice 19(1): 62–79.
Kantor L, Lipton K, Manchester A, Oliveira V. 1997. Estimating and
addressing America’s food losses. Food Review 20(1): 2–12.
Parfitt J, Barthel M, Macnaughton S. 2010. Food waste within food
supply chains: quantification and potential for change to 2050.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological
Sciences 365(1554): 3065.
Parry ML, Rosenzweig C, Iglesias A, Livermore M, Fischer G.
2004. Effects of climate change on global food production under
SRES emissions and socio-economic scenarios. Global Environ-
mental Change 14(1): 53–67.
Pink S. 2007. Doing Visual Ethnography: Images, Media and
Representation in Research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Rosenzweig C, Parry ML. 1994. Potential impact of climate change
on world food supply. Nature 367(6459): 133–138.
Schneider F. 2008. Wasting food: an insistent behaviour. Proceedings
Waste: The Social Context 8: 1–10.
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Schneider F, Obersteiner G. 2007. Food waste in residual waste of
households – regional and socio-economic differences.
Schwartz D. 1989. Visual ethnography: using photography in qual-
itative research. Qualitative Sociology 12(2): 119–154.
Stern PC. 2000. New environmental theories: toward a coherent the-
ory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of social
issues 56(3): 407–424.
Thieme A, Comber R, Miebach J, Weeden J, Kraemer N,
Lawson S, Olivier P. 2012. We’ve Bin Watching You: De-
signing for Reflection and Social Persuasion to Promote Sus-
tainable Lifestyles. Paper presented at the CHI: New York,
NY, USA.
Tsiros M, Heilman CM. 2005. The effect of expiration dates and
perceived risk on purchasing behavior in grocery store perish-
able categories. Journal of marketing 69(2): 114–129.
Tucker P, Douglas P. 2007. Understanding Household Waste
Prevention Behaviour. Final report. WR0112.
Van Herpen E, Pennings J, Meulenberg M. 2003. Consumers’ evaluations
of socially responsible activities in retailing. Wageningen University.
Vermeir I, Verbeke W. 2006. Sustainable food consumption:
exploring the consumer “attitude-behavioral intention” gap. Journal
of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19(2): 169–194.
Vidgen HA, Gallegos D. 2010. Food literacy: time for a new term or
just another buzzword? Journal of the Home Economics Institute
of Australia 17(2): 2–8.
Wade C. 2011. Annual Waste Characterisation Survey. Brisbane
City Council, Queensland Government: Brisbane.
J. Consumer Behav. 13: 393–402 (2014)
DOI: 10.1002/cb